[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: ATTENTION !!! the AO-7 log 'CQ' chaps.




Hi Ed,
            Good idea !! ... yes it could ... but the problem is getting hold of Emily (N1DID, ex: W0EEC) who wrote the program ... I respect the copyright laws and can't change anything without her permission.

Have a good day Ed.

73 John.   <la2qaa@amsdat.org>
....................................................................................................

> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:44:50 -0800
> To: la2qaa@amsat.org
> From: kl7uw@acsalaska.net
> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb]  ATTENTION !!! the AO-7 log 'CQ' chaps.
> 
> john,
> 
> Frustrating, I'm sure.  I am wondering if the log entry program can 
> be modified to reject any input including the word "CQ"?  If those 
> sending in the CQ reports got repeaded blocks to their entries, 
> perhaps they would give up?  ...and save your sanity ;-)
> 
> my 2cents!
> 
> At 12:49 AM 3/15/2008, you wrote:
> 
> 
> >CQ does *NOT* belong in the QSO pane of the AO-7 log. That pane is 
> >for 'actual' QSO's ... 'CQ' might be valid in the COMMENTS field 
> >though I doubt if anyone is interested that somebody called CQ.
> >
> >The following "instruction" is in fact on the same page as the log 
> >entry page but here seems to be difficulty with English speaking 
> >stations *NOT understanding the (quote) "If you need to change an 
> >entry you have made, click on the magnifying glass to review the 
> >record ,then click the update link (unquote).
> >
> >Presumably, after several requests on the bb's for a little more 
> >dilligence in filling out the log it's quite likely that it's being 
> >done deliberately, which is about on par with the VFO swisher intelligence
> >(or should one say, lack of).
> >
> >It has been suggested that these stations might not read the bb's ...
> >point taken - but surely they have eyes? ... and can read their own 
> >entries? ... (as well as the sentence at the top of the page).
> >
> >There is *ALWAYS* an excuse for human error ... but the same error 
> >consistently ... well ... you know as well as everyone else ...
> >
> >As I mentioned previously, regarding 'statistics' - if they're not 
> >collated correctly, the results will be incorrect ... in that case, 
> >what is the point in filling out the log in the first place ??.
> >
> >Pardon me for trying to preserve a very useful resource.
> >
> >73 John.   <la2qaa@amsat.org>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> >Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> >Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> 
> *****************************************************
> 73, Ed - KL7UW              BP40iq, 6m - 3cm
> 144-EME: FT-847, mgf-1801, 4x-xp20, 185w
> http://www.kl7uw.com     AK VHF-Up Group
> NA Rep. for DUBUS: dubususa@hotmail.com
> ***************************************************** 
> 
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home